• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Machine learning and artificial intelligence research for patient benefit: 20 critical questions on transparency, replicability, ethics, and effectiveness.机器学习和人工智能研究如何造福患者:透明度、可重复性、伦理和有效性方面的 20 个关键问题。
BMJ. 2020 Mar 20;368:l6927. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6927.
2
How Bioethics Can Shape Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.生物伦理学如何塑造人工智能和机器学习
Hastings Cent Rep. 2018 Sep;48(5):10-13. doi: 10.1002/hast.895.
3
Ethics Implications of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Violence Risk Assessment.人工智能在暴力风险评估中的使用所涉及的伦理问题。
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2020 Sep;48(3):345-349. doi: 10.29158/JAAPL.003940-20. Epub 2020 May 14.
4
Prestigious AI meeting takes steps to improve ethics of research.著名人工智能会议采取措施提升研究伦理。
Nature. 2021 Jan;589(7840):12-13. doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-03611-8.
5
AI, Machine Learning, and Ethics in Health Care.医疗保健中的人工智能、机器学习与伦理
J Leg Med. 2019 Oct-Dec;39(4):427-441. doi: 10.1080/01947648.2019.1690604.
6
Ethics of artificial intelligence in embryo assessment: mapping the terrain.胚胎评估中人工智能的伦理问题:勾勒全貌
Hum Reprod. 2025 Feb 1;40(2):179-185. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deae264.
7
Advancing AI Data Ethics in Nursing: Future Directions for Nursing Practice, Research, and Education.推进护理人工智能数据伦理:护理实践、研究和教育的未来方向。
JMIR Nurs. 2024 Oct 25;7:e62678. doi: 10.2196/62678.
8
Targeting Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Algorithms in Health Care to Reduce Bias and Improve Population Health.将机器学习和人工智能算法应用于医疗保健领域,以减少偏见并提高人口健康水平。
Milbank Q. 2024 Sep;102(3):577-604. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12712. Epub 2024 Aug 8.
9
Can AI deliver advice that is judgement-free for science policy?人工智能能否提供对科学政策无偏见的建议?
Nature. 2023 Dec;624(7991):252. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-03949-9.
10
Ethical Concerns for Remote Computer Perception in Cardiology: New Stages for Digital Health Technologies, Artificial Intelligence, and Machine Learning.心脏病学中远程计算机感知的伦理问题:数字健康技术、人工智能和机器学习的新阶段
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2024 May;17(5):e010717. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.123.010717. Epub 2024 May 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Biases in AI: acknowledging and addressing the inevitable ethical issues.人工智能中的偏见:认识并解决不可避免的伦理问题。
Front Digit Health. 2025 Aug 20;7:1614105. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1614105. eCollection 2025.
2
A practical framework for appropriate implementation and review of artificial intelligence (FAIR-AI) in healthcare.医疗保健领域人工智能合理实施与审查实用框架(FAIR-AI)
NPJ Digit Med. 2025 Aug 11;8(1):514. doi: 10.1038/s41746-025-01900-y.
3
Ethical-legal implications of AI-powered healthcare in critical perspective.批判性视角下人工智能驱动的医疗保健的伦理法律影响
Front Artif Intell. 2025 Jul 2;8:1619463. doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1619463. eCollection 2025.
4
Development and Validation of a Novel Risk Calculator to Predict Sub-optimal HIV Outcomes Among Pregnant and Postpartum Women with HIV in Kenya.用于预测肯尼亚感染艾滋病毒的孕妇和产后妇女不良艾滋病毒结局的新型风险计算器的开发与验证
AIDS Behav. 2025 Jul 10. doi: 10.1007/s10461-025-04814-8.
5
Using Machine Learning to Predict Treatment Outcome in a Concatenated Dataset of Youth Anxiety Treatments.使用机器学习预测青少年焦虑症治疗的合并数据集中的治疗结果。
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2025 Jul 3. doi: 10.1007/s10578-025-01873-9.
6
Evaluation of changes in prediction modelling in biomedicine using systematic reviews.使用系统评价评估生物医学中预测模型的变化
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Jul 1;25(1):167. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02605-2.
7
Proposing core competencies for physicians in using artificial intelligence tools in clinical practice.提出医生在临床实践中使用人工智能工具的核心能力要求。
Intern Med J. 2025 Aug;55(8):1403-1409. doi: 10.1111/imj.70112. Epub 2025 Jun 27.
8
Signature gene expression model for quantitative evaluation of MASH-like liver injury in mice.用于定量评估小鼠MASH样肝损伤的特征基因表达模型。
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2025 Jun 15;502:117442. doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2025.117442.
9
Artificial Intelligence in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Systematic Review.强迫症中的人工智能:一项系统综述。
Curr Treat Options Psychiatry. 2025;12(1):23. doi: 10.1007/s40501-025-00359-8. Epub 2025 Jun 14.
10
Derivation and Experimental Performance of Standard and Novel Uncertainty Calibration Techniques.标准及新型不确定度校准技术的推导与实验性能
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2025 May 22;2024:212-221. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
Predictive analytics in health care: how can we know it works?医疗保健中的预测分析:我们如何知道它是否有效?
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Dec 1;26(12):1651-1654. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz130.
2
Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records.借助电子健康记录实现可扩展且准确的深度学习。
NPJ Digit Med. 2018 May 8;1:18. doi: 10.1038/s41746-018-0029-1. eCollection 2018.
3
"Giving something back": A systematic review and ethical enquiry into public views on the use of patient data for research in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.“回馈社会”:关于英国和爱尔兰共和国公众对将患者数据用于研究的看法的系统评价与伦理调查
Wellcome Open Res. 2019 Jan 17;3:6. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.13531.2. eCollection 2018.
4
Can AI Help Reduce Disparities in General Medical and Mental Health Care?人工智能能否帮助减少普通医疗和心理健康护理方面的差异?
AMA J Ethics. 2019 Feb 1;21(2):E167-179. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2019.167.
5
A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models.系统评价显示,机器学习在临床预测模型中并未优于逻辑回归。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jun;110:12-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.02.004. Epub 2019 Feb 11.
6
What's holding up the big data revolution in healthcare?是什么阻碍了医疗保健领域的大数据革命?
BMJ. 2018 Dec 28;363:k5357. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k5357.
7
Improving palliative care with deep learning.利用深度学习改善姑息治疗。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018 Dec 12;18(Suppl 4):122. doi: 10.1186/s12911-018-0677-8.
8
Effects and costs of implementing predictive risk stratification in primary care: a randomised stepped wedge trial.实施初级保健预测风险分层的效果和成本:一项随机阶梯式楔形试验。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Sep;28(9):697-705. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-007976. Epub 2018 Nov 5.
9
Genomic Risk Prediction of Coronary Artery Disease in 480,000 Adults: Implications for Primary Prevention.对 480,000 名成年人的冠心病的基因组风险预测:对一级预防的影响。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Oct 16;72(16):1883-1893. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.07.079.
10
Identifying the PECO: A framework for formulating good questions to explore the association of environmental and other exposures with health outcomes.确定PECO:一个用于提出好问题以探究环境及其他暴露因素与健康结果之间关联的框架。
Environ Int. 2018 Dec;121(Pt 1):1027-1031. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.07.015. Epub 2018 Aug 27.

机器学习和人工智能研究如何造福患者:透明度、可重复性、伦理和有效性方面的 20 个关键问题。

Machine learning and artificial intelligence research for patient benefit: 20 critical questions on transparency, replicability, ethics, and effectiveness.

机构信息

Alan Turing Institute, Kings Cross, London, UK.

Departments of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

出版信息

BMJ. 2020 Mar 20;368:l6927. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6927.

DOI:10.1136/bmj.l6927
PMID:32198138
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11515850/
Abstract

Machine learning, artificial intelligence, and other modern statistical methods are providing new opportunities to operationalise previously untapped and rapidly growing sources of data for patient benefit. Despite much promising research currently being undertaken, particularly in imaging, the literature as a whole lacks transparency, clear reporting to facilitate replicability, exploration for potential ethical concerns, and clear demonstrations of effectiveness. Among the many reasons why these problems exist, one of the most important (for which we provide a preliminary solution here) is the current lack of best practice guidance specific to machine learning and artificial intelligence. However, we believe that interdisciplinary groups pursuing research and impact projects involving machine learning and artificial intelligence for health would benefit from explicitly addressing a series of questions concerning transparency, reproducibility, ethics, and effectiveness (TREE). The 20 critical questions proposed here provide a framework for research groups to inform the design, conduct, and reporting; for editors and peer reviewers to evaluate contributions to the literature; and for patients, clinicians and policy makers to critically appraise where new findings may deliver patient benefit.

摘要

机器学习、人工智能和其他现代统计方法为挖掘和利用以前未被开发的、快速增长的患者数据资源提供了新的机会。尽管目前正在进行大量有前景的研究,特别是在影像学方面,但整个文献缺乏透明度、明确的报告以促进可重复性、对潜在伦理问题的探索,以及对有效性的明确展示。存在这些问题的原因有很多,其中最重要的原因之一(我们在这里提供了一个初步的解决方案)是目前缺乏针对机器学习和人工智能的最佳实践指导。然而,我们认为,从事涉及机器学习和人工智能的健康研究和影响项目的跨学科团队,如果能够明确解决透明度、可重复性、伦理和有效性方面的一系列问题(TREE),将会受益。这里提出的 20 个关键问题为研究团队提供了一个框架,用于告知设计、进行和报告;供编辑和同行评审者评估对文献的贡献;并让患者、临床医生和政策制定者批判性地评估新发现可能为患者带来的益处。